BuildCommDCBAndTimeouts patch

[Dimitrie O. Paun]

On September 9, 2003 08:46 pm, Kevin Groeneveld wrote:
> One question I have is how should the differences in Windows versions be
> handled?  This question applies to both the wine implementation and the
> tests.
>
> One example is that BuildCommDCB in Windows 95 sets the DCBlength member
> of DCB but Windows 2000 does not.  Should wine account for this
> difference?  Should the regression test?  In the patch I submitted I
> always set the DCBlength member and documented the difference in Windows
> versions in a comment.

These are good questions, and there is no absolute answer. However, as
a rule of thumb, we try follow the NT lineage if the behaviors are 
conflicting. In this case, it seems that the Win95 one is the more 
"compatible" one, so I'd stick to that in the implementation for now if 
you have apps that depend on that.

In other words, if a certain thing is implemented differently in various
versions of Windows it most likely means that apps don't depend on any
one behavior. So we are free to implement any one of them, and as for
testing we don't need to test for any one in particular.

-- 
Dimi.